Various common genetic susceptibility loci have been identified for breast cancer; however, it is unclear how they combine with lifestyle/environmental risk factors to influence risk. We undertook an international collaborative study to assess gene-environment interaction for risk of breast cancer. Data from 24 studies of the Breast Cancer Association Consortium were pooled. Using up to 34,793 invasive breast cancers and 41,099 controls, we examined whether the relative risks associated with 23 single nucleotide polymorphisms were modified by 10 established environmental risk factors (age at menarche, parity, breastfeeding, body mass index, height, oral contraceptive use, menopausal hormone therapy use, alcohol consumption, cigarette smoking, physical activity) in women of European ancestry. We used logistic regression models stratified by study and adjusted for age and performed likelihood ratio tests to assess gene–environment interactions. All statistical tests were two-sided. We replicated previously reported potential interactions between LSP1-rs3817198 and parity (Pinteraction = 2.4×10−6) and between CASP8-rs17468277 and alcohol consumption (Pinteraction = 3.1×10−4). Overall, the per-allele odds ratio (95% confidence interval) for LSP1-rs3817198 was 1.08 (1.01–1.16) in nulliparous women and ranged from 1.03 (0.96–1.10) in parous women with one birth to 1.26 (1.16–1.37) in women with at least four births. For CASP8-rs17468277, the per-allele OR was 0.91 (0.85–0.98) in those with an alcohol intake of <20 g/day and 1.45 (1.14–1.85) in those who drank ≥20 g/day. Additionally, interaction was found between 1p11.2-rs11249433 and ever being parous (Pinteraction = 5.3×10−5), with a per-allele OR of 1.14 (1.11–1.17) in parous women and 0.98 (0.92–1.05) in nulliparous women. These data provide first strong evidence that the risk of breast cancer associated with some common genetic variants may vary with environmental risk factors.

In a large population-based case-control study in Germany, including 3,464 breast cancer cases aged 50-74 at diagnosis and 6,657 population based and frequency matched controls, we investigated the effects of menopausal hormone therapy (HT) by type, regimen, timing and progestagenic constituent on postmenopausal breast cancer risk overall and according to histological type. Data were collected by face-to-face interviews. Logistic and polytomous logistic regression analysis were used to estimate odds ratios (OR) and 95%-confidence intervals (95% CI). Risk of invasive breast cancer was significantly elevated in current users (OR, 1.73, 95% CI, 1.55-1.94) and heterogeneous by histological type (p < 0.01), being more than 2-fold higher for lobular and tubular than for ductal cancer. Risks for current users varied significantly by type and regimen of HT, with ORs per year of use of 1.05 (95% CI, 1.04-1.06) for continuous combined estrogen-progestagen, 1.03 (95% CI, 1.02-1.04) for cyclical EP and 1.01 (95% CI, 1.00-1.03) for estrogen-only therapy. No statistically significant increase in risk was observed after 5 years of cessation of HT use for any histological type. Analyses of progestagenic content by regimen revealed a significantly higher risk for continuously administered norethisterone-or levonorgestrel-derived progestagens than for continuously administered progesterone-derived progestagens (OR, 2.27, 95% CI, 1.98-2.62 vs. 1.47, 95% CI, 1.12-1.93, respectively, p 5 0.003), which may be explained by dose rather than type of progestagen. These data suggest that the risks associated with menopausal HT differ by type and regimen of HT and histological type of breast cancer and may vary by progestagenic component, depending on the effective dose. ' 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc.Key words: breast cancer; histological type; hormone therapy; progestin; epidemiology Menopausal hormone therapy (HT) has been established as a risk factor for the development of breast cancer, 1 with combined estrogen-progestagen (EP) therapy posing a greater risk than mono-estrogen therapy.2-7 The extent to which this risk difference is in turn affected by duration and recency of use, particularly for past long-term users, requires further clarification. Recent evidence from observational studies has shown that risk varies according to tumor histology, with current use of both mono-estrogen and EP therapy carrying greater risks for invasive lobular and tubular cancers than for invasive ductal cancer. 4,[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] The higher risk associated with EP therapy compared to mono-estrogen therapy has also been observed across different histological tumor types. 6,17,18 Several studies have investigated differences in risk by regimen, 2,5,18-21 however, a higher risk for continuous than for cyclical EP therapy was found only in Scandinavian studies. 18,20,22 Less information is available on the role of progestagens in EP therapy, specifically regarding the effects of type, dose and the number of days it is administered each month. Wh...

Physical activity (PA) has been inversely associated with postmenopausal breast cancer risk. However, it is unclear how and in which life periods PA may be effective to reduce breast cancer risk. Moreover, the evidence is still not judged as 'convincing' as there is some heterogeneity among study results. Most studies regarded breast cancer as a single disease, at best separated by menopausal status. Yet, breast cancers are heterogeneous and likely have different etiologies. Therefore, we analyzed the association of PA with different breast cancer subtypes in 3,414 postmenopausal cases and 6,569 controls from a case-control study on breast cancer conducted [2002][2003][2004][2005] in Germany (MARIE study). PA in the age periods 30-49 and 50+ years was assessed, including leisure-time PA (sports, cycling, walking) and non-recreational PA (occupational and household activities). There was a significant protective effect of leisure-time PA for ER+/PR+ carcinomas (adjusted odds ratio = 0.71, 95% confidence interval: 0.60, 0.85; trend P = 0.0001), but no effect for ER-/PRcarcinomas. Moreover, looking at physical activity pattern over time, the effect of PA after menopause on reducing breast cancer risk was more pronounced than the effect of PA before menopause. Overall, effects of PA were independent from adult weight gain, body mass index, and energy intake. These findings suggest that leisure-time PA after menopause may reduce postmenopausal breast cancer risk at least in part via hormonal pathways and not solely by changing body composition. Inactive postmenopausal women should be encouraged to become physically active even later in life. (Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2008;17(12):3402 -10)

Background:Research on the association between dietary patterns and breast cancer survival is very limited.Methods:A prospective follow-up study was conducted in Germany, including 2522 postmenopausal breast cancer patients diagnosed in 2001–2005 with available food frequency questionnaire data. Vital status, causes of death, and recurrences were verified through the end of 2009. Principle component factor analysis was used to identify pre-diagnostic dietary patterns. Hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated with Cox proportional hazards models.Results:Two major dietary patterns were identified: ‘healthy' (high intakes of vegetables, fruits, vegetable oil, sauces/condiments, and soups/bouillons) and ‘unhealthy' (high intakes of red meat, processed meat, and deep-frying fat). Increasing consumption of an ‘unhealthy' dietary pattern was associated with an increased risk of non-breast cancer mortality (highest vs lowest quartile: HR, 3.69; 95% CI, 1.66–8.17; P-trend <0.001). No associations with breast cancer-specific mortality and breast cancer recurrence were found. The ‘healthy' dietary pattern was inversely associated with overall mortality (HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.47–1.15; P-trend=0.02) and breast cancer recurrence (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.48–1.06; P-trend=0.02) in stage I–IIIa patients only.Conclusion:Increasing intake of an ‘unhealthy' pre-diagnostic dietary pattern may increase the risk of non-breast cancer mortality, whereas increasing intake of a ‘healthy' pattern may reduce the risk of overall mortality and breast cancer recurrence.